Many see Bush immigration proposals as non-starter (Proposal Faces "Fierce" Resistence In House)

Reuters ^ | 01.07.04 | Alan Elsner

[Pubbie]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush dived into a heated political debate on Wednesday by proposing to create a class of legal "guest workers" in the United States, but analysts said it was doubtful the blueprint could gain congressional approval in this election year.

In a carefully balanced speech, Bush proposed giving some of the estimated 8 million to 14 million illegal immigrants in the country a way to gain three-year temporary work permits, but offered them no clear path to becoming U.S. citizens.

"Our laws should allow willing foreigners to enter our country and fill jobs that Americans are not filling. We must make our immigration laws more rational and more humane," Bush declared.

The proposal seemed calculated to win Bush Hispanic support ahead of the November presidential election while pleasing employers looking for workers to fill mainly manual, agricultural or low paid service jobs.

"The hype and misinformation that this speech will fuel in the immigrant community will be huge. Unfortunately, the excitement will far outweigh the real effect," said Jeff Goldman, an immigration lawyer with Testa, Hurwitz and Thibeault in Boston.

Bush was at pains to declare he was not offering amnesty for people who entered the United States illegally, but opponents of making concessions to the immigrants said that was exactly what he had done.

"This clearly is an amnesty. It provides not only amnesty but a reward for people who committed a felony by coming here illegally," said Rep. Elton Gallegly, a California Republican.

"There will be substantial opposition from Republicans, Democrats and millions of ordinary Americans once they realize what's involved," Gallegly told Reuters.

CAUTIOUS BACKING

While the proposals won some cautious backing from Hispanic groups and immigration backers, some analysts were doubtful that Bush would put much political muscle behind them in the face of fierce opposition from many in his own Republican political base.

"I don't think it's serious. Bush knows the politics. These proposals don't go far enough for most Democrats and they go too far for around 70 to 100 Republicans in the House of Representatives," said Steven Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors more stringent limits on immigration.

"Republican leaders in Congress won't want to bring up this issue, especially this year, because it divides them. Unless Bush twists their arms hard, this is going nowhere," he said.

Legal and illegal immigration to the United States, already at record levels in the 1990s, accelerated further after 2000 despite the economic slowdown, according to U.S. Census data.

From 2000 to 2002, net immigration to the United States averaged around 1.4 million per year, about half a million of whom entered or stayed in the country illegally.

Bush, who won around 35 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2000, would like to raise that proportion to 40 percent or higher this year. Even if he does nothing to push the proposals, the President will be able to incorporate them into his campaign message aimed at Hispanics.

"This makes no sense except political sense. It reeks of bad policy but screams of politics," said David Ray, assistant director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a group campaigning for sharply reduced levels of immigration.

FAIR argued that the plan undermined homeland security, granted an amnesty for law-breakers, established a back door immigration program and threatened the jobs and wages of American workers.

On the other side of the debate, immigration backers were disappointed that the plan offered no clear path for illegal immigrants to become citizens.

"The initial proposal falls short in helping newcomers become fully integrated into our society, but we look forward to working with the administration and Congress to shape the final legislation," said Leonard Glickman, president of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the country's oldest migration organization.

[SUSSA]

This is an amnisty because it lets the criminals off the hook for their crimes and makes them legal.

[Aetius]

I've read extensively about the immigration issue, and I know that right now we are admitting about one million legal immigrants per year. Yet Bush says that Congress needs to increase the annual alotment of 'Green Cards" from 140,000 to some unspecified higher level.

My question is this: What exactly does a 'Green Card' entail? Is it one specific category of a visa? It can't encompass all immigration because we already admit about 8 times as many people as the limit Bush quoted. So what was he talking about?

Whatever the case, its nice to know that Bush has continued the tradition of thumbing his nose to what most polls show to be the majority position on this issue which is to reduce legal immigration, get serious about stopping illegal immigration, and not reward illegals with such things as amnesty and drivers licenses, and in-state tuition.

And does anyone really doubt that any 'guest' that wants to get permanent residency after the 3 or 6 yrs ends won't get it? Of course they will. Then they can sposor their extended families and already mass levels of legal immigration will skyrocket to even higher levels.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

How is he passing this responsibility off to others, isn't it Congress that makes legislation?

I would worry more about my senators and my congressman, than I would worry about the president. Congress can do much more damage than the president on this issue.

[gooleyman]

If borderline voters really think that the country will be better off by getting ANY of the democratic candidates in office, we have far more problems than illegals.

You're right, I'm afraid. I've talked to a couple of Freepers who think we'd be better off with a DemocRAT. One guy said he would be willing for things to get worse under a DemocRAT so that his third party would get a leg up. We argued in several LONG posts each and I never could convince him of his folly. I guess he finally gave up on me too, because he didn't answer my last thesis.

-----
After reading so many of these angry posts, all threatening to abandon Bush over this, I just feel sick.

Me too. A lot of them are looking for a reason...any reason will do. While I'm not in favor of this particular bill and there are others he's signed that I'm not keen on, I still don't see anyone on the RAT side that's anywhere close. And the Third Parters can forget it this time around.

-----
He will not lose my vote.

Mine either. The last thing I want to see is a repeat of 1992 when Clintoon sneaked in on Perot's back. (Now watch someone dispute the "Perot's back" portion of that.)

-----
Do you have a lot a border problems there in Ohio?

I have no idea, but as you stated later in your 2nd post to me, the coastline of Lake Erie seems wide open for it. Seems it would be easy for a boatload of illegals to land, I don't know.

-----
For my entire life, I have never seen any evidence that these workers are going to destroy us or our economy (or anything else for that matter).

You've got a point. If anything they work cheap and keep our produce prices low. However....I have to say, we have immigration laws. And those laws are being violated. Whether you agree with the laws or not, they are being broken. I think than an amnesty is not the answer. I think it would be better to modify the existing laws to make it a little easier to enter legally. There is too much red tape and some of it could be eliminated so that the people who have tried to follow the law are not, in essence punished. By that I mean, for all these years they've been trying to do it through the proper way and these skates all of a sudden get "pardoned". How do you think they'll feel?

-----
I would much prefer these men to some of the homegrown jerks we have here who don't want to work and happily abandon their families.

I have to agree that we've raised some "homegrown" jerks, but I can't believe that all Mexicans are wholesome and true. Just like I can't say that all Americans are good or bad, Neither can I lump all Mexicans as good or bad either. Both contain a mixture.

-----
...It will help on the Homeland Security front.

I guess I don't understand how this can have ANY effect on Homeland Security. The criminal element of this bunch are not going to register no matter what. It's like gun laws. The true criminals aren't going to follow ANY law much less a gun law. As the old saying goes: WHEN THEY OUTLAW MARRIAGE, ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE INLAWS. (or something like that). In my opinion, this will have NO effect, good or bad, on Homeland Security. Please explain in more detail...I CAN be convinced...smile.

Happy New Year!!

[goldstategop]

Its not even a guest program. I'm in favor of a guest program since most illegals do work no American's willing to do but I draw the line at amnesty. Jorge W. Bush and Karl Rove need to go back to the drawing boards on this one. The conservative base has swallowed a lot but if they really push this through Congress, it'll be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

[Tempest]

"This is an amnisty because it lets the criminals off the hook for their crimes and makes them legal."

I'll give you the part where it does let them off the hook. But it doesn't neccesarily make them legal. It makes them elligable to enter the system at the back of the line.

But in reality no politician out there is planning on mass deportations as far as I know. Do you???

Basically they're already here and they're untraced and unaccounted. Their illegal status allows their employers to undercut wages and keep farm work in a non-competative state in comparison to other industries. This initiative is more likely to promote wage increases that may make the work of produce picking more viable for a young American who needs or wants a summer job. Yet even if he doesn't the jobs will still be there and they still need to filled in the meantime.

[Pubbie]

No it's a temporary Guest worker program.

After 5 years they can apply for a green card - but there is such a huge backlog that it could take decades for them to become citizens.

Most will never get citizenship.

The 86 Amnesty gave citizenship - this doesn't.

[SUSSA]

The plan Bush proposed today makes them legal. The part about getting into the system at the end of the line is about becoming citizens not becoming legal residents.

As for mass deportations; all the administration has to do is enforce the laws already on the books. It is illegal to hire an illegal alien. Corporate executives can go to jail for doing it. Put a few executives in jail and watch the jobs dry up.

It is also illegal to conspire with a criminal to commit or cover up a federal crime. Put some of the people who harbor the alien criminals in jail and fewer of them will help the criminals.

There is also the Rico law, which is mostly used to persecute Christians who are trying to keep babies from being killed. The RICO law allows the government to confiscate the assets of any company or group that is suspected entering a criminal conspiracy. It is then up to the entity that forfeited the property to prove they are innocent.

If the feds confiscated a couple of companies, say Tyson Foods, the jobs would really dry up. That’s how you fix the problem. You don’t fix it by rewarding the criminals.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

We were wondering the same thing. It has been a security NIGHTMARE to find and register all the "illegals". They are not going to get "amnesty"..and they will have to be "registered" and we'll know "who and where" they are.

Not only that.. they will "pay" taxes.

This could be a REALLY good thing.

We are still looking at "ALL" aspects of it and not having a "knee jerk" reaction to it.

[citizen]

Maybe some real Conservatives will stand up to the RINOs on this amnesty program.

Bush is RINO-in-Chief, I think that is clear now, only looking for votes.

I'm voting my tagline.

[glasseye]

I am SICK of the people still beliveing this BULLSH*T about "Americans won't do these jobs"!!!!!!!!!

This IS about CHEAP labor!!!!!!!!

You offer $5 bucks an hour to pick lettuce and I won't be taking that job,,,,,,but offer $40 per hour and you will have plenty of workers!!!!!!!!

What this is about is an UNLIMITED supply of poor people who will work for peanuts and do awful jobs.

This kind of policy will DESTROY our standard of living if we do not stop it!!!!!!

Why ever hire a 'native' when you can hire an illeagle for half the price?????

[Tempest]

I think it's rather safe to say that neither this administration nor any administration after will ever be willing to enforce mass deportations. Regardless of what the laws are.

As far as putting corporate executives in jail that's a rather absurd notion as well. If any company has an illegal immigrant on their payroll you can be quite assured that the person is rather low on the food chain and that culpability for th crime would be relegated to whoever is in charge of hiring and that will most likely not be anyone worth going after. Because whoever he is replaced with will be expected to keep the cost of labor to the company down as well.

I'm not quite sure how you'll be able to go after the head of food companies either when they'll just cite that their growers are independent contrators that are part of a large conglomerate.

Of course attempting all of this will get the US goverment slapped with many lawsuits and accussations of civil and human rights violations all while failing to provide tracebility of the illegal immigrant that are already here nor will it help to stem the influx of illegal immigrants.

Do you have any other suggestions?

[dmzTahoe]

"Bush has passed the ball back to Congress. Let Miller and Chambliss quash this. I think that is what Bush hopes will happen."

Just like he signed off on Campaign Finance Reform, knowing it would be squashed by the Supreme Court?

The only way to get Dubya to make a 180 is to hit him where it hurts...money.

I for one already sent notice that I will not donate any more money to the Republican Party. I will donate to individuals who share my ideals, but no longer the party. Bush has raised over $91 Million to date. If he only has $92 Million by next month, he will understand we are serious.

GWB has turned a route of an election into a horserace...

[CWOJackson]

In 1997 the Coast Guard paid to have a new roof put on our warehouse on pier 36 in Seattle. The old roof on this 1925 building was in terrible condition. Conditions in the mechanical shops and other facilities inside were terrible. After a couple of years of working on it permission and funding were finally given to replace the roof.

Half way through the project the INS showed up at the front gate and asked permission/assistance with a problem...about 2/3's of the contractors workers were hauled off and sent home.

You never know...

[SUSSA]

Tyson was working criminals in their own plants. A plant manager got a slap on the wrist. Under RICO the government could have taken the whole company until the company proved they were innocent.

I agree that this administration will not enforce the law. I’m not sure that we are forever stuck with political hacks who care nothing about the rule of law.

A few years ago there were quite a few people here who said they cared about the rule of law. That number has drastically diminished over the past three years. The rule of law doesn’t matter much to a lot of people here who were screaming about how important it was just three years ago.

Hopefully, there are enough people left in the country who want to live in a country of laws to change the situation. If enough people raise a big enough stink, things can change.

[texasflower]

You do have some very good points. Particularly when you referenced the workers that have tried to do things the right way all along. The ones that didn't bother with the rules will get a "free pass", so to speak.

While this isn't fair, in any new program there has to be a starting place. This is simply the only attainable starting place, IMO.

As far as boaters coming in, I do think those sort of things are harder to control. If this program gets implemented, land borders will have definable checkpoints. Those checkpoints will help to control what is brought into the country. (Homeland Security plus) We can search those people and what they bring in.

Boats can enter more easily and can avoid detection, bringing in who knows what (until it blows something up, that is).

My ex-husband is now in Miami and they really have the most trouble with the Haitians. They manage all sorts of ways to enter. He certainly has some stories! It's sort of amazing how the water can be used.

I understand what you are saying about the criminal types not following the rules and because of that, we may not have as much access as we would like as to who they are.

But.....consider these situations.

If more workers are entering by legal checkpoints, it will truly be easier to keep watch on the much smaller group that will be making their way through other means. It is easier to track 2 or 3 sneaking in, than to try to watch hundreds. Surveillance can be made more effective. Much more effective in fact.

Finally, if this program works as the president says, the workers will have to prove that they have a job. Not only that, the employers will have to prove that they have hired them.

By involving the employers, we actually encourage them to hire Americans. Wouldn't you want to hire employees that you didn't have to account for all the time?

Having guest workers in US businesses would give us more oversight rights and therefore more opportunity to see what goes on. (patriot act?)

Result, more controls (therefore more intel) on the employers. Sorting out "front companies" or whatever that may be used for terrorism seems much easier.

The more things we can legally watch, the safer we are in my opinion.

I know I could have this all wrong. That's just the way it seems to me.

Tammy

[CWOJackson]

I always thought most Texas women had common sense...you reaffirm that notion.

[texasflower]

I think your approach to this is the right one. Knee jerk responses don't do any good. Besides, for the most part, people who doubt GWB, usually end up having to eat some words don't they?!

I think that some people have forgotten that this man decided on war in Iraq, knowing full well that it could cost him his presidency if it failed. But he did it because it was the right thing to do. Not because it was the most popular.

A man like that tends to get the benefit of the doubt with me!

So, I will listen, contemplate and learn.

In my post #137, I listed some of the stuff that makes this seems helpful to me already. I may be way off base with my ideas, but like I said, I will be giving President Bush the benefit of the doubt and I will be giving him my vote, too!

[harpo11]

President Bush's speech today was so gooey, wrapped up with pretty ribbons and teddy bear hugs. He made everything sound so glamorously simple like talking to kindergartners about the tooth fairy.

In all honesty, his speech was an insult to our Proud American Citizenship for which generations of brave and courageous men and women sacrificed their precious lives to defend and protect.

Talk about casting aside your honor, integrity and principles, not to mention our glorious American citizenship, in order to get reelected and satisfy a corrupt and incompetent Vicente Fox and wealthy donors looking for cheap labor and servants.

I hope that Congress has one of the most boisterous, robust and long winded debate on this topic until the next century in order to save our sovereignty and borders. I want to hear Tom Daschle talk about being disconcerted. I want to hear Tom Delay say "no way, Jose". I want to hear Mrs. Clinton screech "It's a VRWC" and "It Takes a Village." I want to hear Ted Kennedy slur, "we have not yet begun to"...well, who knows I can't understand him anyway.

And how about Tom Tancredo, the brave Congressman from Colorado whose lone voice rails against illegal aliens, I want to hear him lead the debate as he has been singled out by Rove/Bush as the man they want to see defeated because he is after all a man who will defend and protect our Constitution and borders.

Let the debates begin and as far as "we the people", "we the citizens", let your congress person know where you stand on President Bush's Rewards for People who Broke the Rule of Law by Entering America Illegally Proposal.